It was inevitable, and it didn't take long. The EUnuchs are unhappy because they weren't consulted about Bush's speech. And the fact that he's not sucking up to their buddy, Arafat.

Some of the quotes are delicious.

...the European official said Bush's broad signal to the Palestinians that Arafat needed to be replaced as a prerequisite to the establishment of a Palestinian state, "is rather alien to European thinking."

Yes, that's why there's still no peace to the Middle East. We've been going along with European "thinking," for far too long.

And here's a shocker:

European heads of state reserved as much criticism for Israel as for the Palestinians.

And the usual idiotarian party line:

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer welcomed Bush's "clear commitment" to peace in the Middle East, but added, "The Palestinian people alone will decide who is their legitimate leader."

That's right, Herr Fischer. And the Palestinian people alone will choose their fate, and live with the consequences of their actions. It's all up to them, now.

Europe has rendered itself utterly irrelevant.

[Update at 5 PM PDT]

Comment "Matt" astutely points out this bit of hypocrisy, in response to the comment that "...Bush's broad signal to the Palestinians that Arafat needed to be replaced as a prerequisite to the establishment of a Palestinian state, "is rather alien to European thinking."

If we don't like your leaders then you can't have what you want? Yeah, the EU never said that to anyone...

*coughHaidercough*

*coughLePencough*

Well, to be fair, maybe they were just talking about replacing Arafat as being alien to their thinking. I'm sure they didn't intend to have a double standard...

...the European official said Bush's broad signal to the Palestinians that Arafat needed to be replaced as a prerequisite to the establishment of a Palestinian state, "is rather alien to European thinking."

If we don't like your leaders then you can't have what you want? Yeah, the EU never said that to anyone...

*coughHaidercough*
*coughLePencough*

sorry, had something in my throat

Bush was simply honest in outlining what must be done for peace to be achieved. Whether it is politically achievable or not is another issue entirely.

Canada and the United States live in peace because they share common values. Capitalism, representative government, personal freedom, are bedrocks of both our societies. On an even deeper level both countries share a common commitment to the values of Western Civilization, largely unquestioned values such as the worth of the individual, equality before the law, the value of rational thought and scientific inquiry, and an expectation of responsive and relatively honest secular government. These memes are often mistaken for "universal" values, or "basic human values" in the West because they are so widespread and unquestioned in our society; but they are actually historical anomalies, nearly unique to the cultures spawned in the European renaissance.

To quote that great Elizabethan sage, Sir Edmund Blackadder "Baldric, to you the Renaissance is just something that happened to other people" a phrase that is true of the Arab world. With the exception of Turkey and Israel no state in the Middle East has embraced the values or culture of the post-renaissance world- for the simple reason that those values would do to the Islamic Mullas what they did to the Papacy, and to the current ruling classes what they did to the Romanovs, Hapbsburgs, and Burbon's.

The leadership of the Arab world is trying to drag their countries into the 21st century technologically while remaining firmly in the 14th century culturally. It is a loosing proposition. However until they do so there can be no peace with Israel or the West, only varying levels of truce, war, cold war, and ongoing violence. For PEACE to break out in the Arab world in general and the Palestinians in particular must first begin to behave in the manner of what was once called "civilized nations". Nations where the deliberate murder of defenseless innocent children is not considered to be a heroic act or an acceptable means to a political end, nations where the terroristic murder of thousands of innocent office workers is not considered a cause of celebration, nations where the security services are there to protect and serve, not oppress, torture, and massacre, nations where the civil service does more than collect bribes and the courts are more than rubber stamps for the local president-for-life-d'jour, and where the citizens are regarded as more than just cannon fodder for the cause.

This is not a political pre-condition, this is a simple historical fact. It remains a fact even though it is politically incomprehensible to the Europeans and politically unacceptable to the Arabs and the Palestinians. Bush's speech is a simple outline of what history teaches us are the required preconditions to a just and lasting peace. The fact that these historically required conditions are unacceptable to the Palestinians and their Arab supporters does not make them any less obligatory, it just means that the fighting will continue on one level or another until the Palestinians are either willing and able to meet those conditions, or extinct.

I am reminded of Jackson's (the president, not Jesse) famous remark about the Supreme Court whenever the EU starts bitching. "They've made their ruling, now let them enforce it."

I don't think Bush telegraphed it clearly enough that "We do not deal with terrorists."

And what is this with Powell??? I'm hearing now that Powell is running around saying that if the Pals. elect Terrafat again that we willl, in fact, deal with him.

If we ever needed a coherant policy towards a people that only understand clarity and more times, force, it's now...WTF is Powell smoking???

I cannot operate under the assumption that this is a Bush ploy as some has suggested in the face of Powell's downright insolence. It seems that the State Department is working outright, against this Administration!

The rumors are already starting that Powell will not be in a second Bush administration, which is fine by me...Cheney will probably be not either, which will be a loss...On a side note, my political phantasy (yeah, I'm a dork) is that Condoleeza Rice gets tapped for the VP job in '04, and runs against Hill in '08.